Nebraska Dem Party Official Glad Scalise Was Shot

According to his words in a released YouTube video, Phil Montag, a technology chairman for the Nebraska Democratic Party, was glad that House Majority Steve Scalise was shot last week, and he wishes that Scalise had been killed.

“This motherf***r, his whole job is to get people, convince Republicans to f***ing kick people off of f***ing health care,” Montag was captured saying. “I’m glad he got shot. I’m not gonna f***ing say that publicly. I’m glad he got shot.”

“I wish he was f***ing dead,” he later added.

Montag was fired by Nebraska Democratic Party Chairwoman Jane Kleeb soon after the audio became public.

The firing came one week after another Democratic leader in Nebraska, Black Caucus Chairwoman Chelsey Gentry-Tipton, posted these disparaging remarks on Facebook about victims of the Congressional baseball shooting:

“Watching the congressman crying on live tv abt the trauma they experienced. Y is this so funny tho?”

“Hard to be empathetic towards those that have no empathy for us. The very people that push pro NRA legislation in efforts to pad their pockets with complete disregard for human life. Yeah, having a hard time feeling bad for them.”

Gentry-Tipton was asked by the state party to resign for her comments, but it doesn’t appear that she has.

It’s hard to fathom, even in the hyper-partisan culture that we now live in, how any political leader could find amusement or take pleasure in another political leader being shot and having to fight for his life.

Is this kind of sentiment representative of the Democratic leadership in Nebraska and beyond? The answer is would certainly be no, but you can bank on one thing: Members of the national media will not demand that prominent Democratic leaders denounce these controversial statements, the way they would Republican leaders if this rhetoric had come from the other side of the aisle.

In the case of Montag in particular, it would seem pertinent to seek comment from Senator Elizabeth Warren. After all, she’s been publicly saying that the Republican healthcare bill will literally kill people, and that the legislation comes down to the GOP trafficking in “blood money” to help rich folks.

Some might dismiss such statements as political hyperbole, but people like Montag clearly subscribe them — to the point where a GOP congressman pushing healthcare reform is so dangerous to society that his murder (in Montag’s mind) would be justifiable.

Personally, I’m of the opinion that individuals should be held accountable for their own words and actions. Then again, I didn’t write the rules of the mainstream media. One of those rules, as often exercised selectively against Republicans, is that when a political figure or group says or does something provocative, notable figures from the affiliated party must answer for it, and be called on to denounce it.

This has been the case with everything from random Tea Party rhetoric, to Rush Limbaugh’s “slut” comment, to statements from political surrogates and local candidates, to Joe Wilson yelling “you lie”, to practically all forms of domestic gun violence, to just about anything related to Donald Trump (going as far back as when he was leading the Birther movement, years before he became a politician).

But you won’t see this in the case of Phil Montag, even though his words could have easily been inspired by the extreme sentiment echoed from the top-tiers of the Democratic party. The mainstream media will instead cast Montag the same way a typical person probably would: as a lone-wolf offender who was dealt with quickly and effectively, thus leaving no need for deeper examination.

And this course of action (or rather non-action) will seem perfectly reasonable to most journalists, even though a much different standard would have been applied if Montag were a Republican.

That’s how ideological bias operates, after all.

And now, a special message from the President of the United States, concerning the release of John A. Daly’s upcoming novel, Broken Slate.




The Liberal Media’s Double Standard

In 2011, after a lunatic in Tucson, Arizona shot Democratic Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, wounded almost 20 more, and killed six, including a 9-year old girl, it took the liberal media elite a nanosecond to pin the crime on — who else? — conservative Republicans and their supposed “toxic rhetoric.”

While police were still scouring the crime scene, Paul Krugman, the New York Times hard left columnist wrote: “Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right.

An editorial in the Times also pinned the Tucson violence on Republicans: “It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge.”

Matt Bai wrote in the New York Times that conservatives who use words like “tyranny” to describe politicians “shouldn’t be blind to the idea that Americans legitimately faced with either enemy would almost certainly take up arms.”

In Politico, Michael Kinsley, a quasi intellectual of the progressive left, wrote that, “The suggestion, finally, is that the right is largely responsible for a political atmosphere in which extreme thoughts are more likely to take root and flower.”

They blamed Glen Beck and Bill O’Reilly and Fox News in general and Sarah Palin in particular. Never mind that the gunman was mentally ill – and not just a little bit. Never mind that there was not a shred of evidence that he ever heard the name Sarah Palin or any of the others. That, to elite media liberals, was irrelevant. The only point they cared about was linking conservatives to a crime committed by a mentally unstable young man.

Now it’s 2017 and we have the shooting on the baseball field. And we have lots of people on both sides saying it’s time to tone down the rhetoric.

Sounds good. But before we attempt that, a few questions are worth asking:

Where were the liberal elites when Madonna said she wanted to blow up the White House?

Where were the liberal elites when so-called progressives took to the streets with their signs that said Donald Trump was Adolf Hitler?

Where were the liberal elites when Democrats said Donald Trump was not a legitimate president and that he was a threat to the United States of America?

Where were they when Maxine Waters, the progressive Democratic congresswoman from California, said Mr. Trump’s cabinet was composed of “scumbags”?

Where were they when, progressives said Republican policies would, as Mollie Hemingway writes in the Federalist “destroy the planet, enslave women, or kill sick people”?

Where were they, Ms. Hemmingway asks, when mainstream media outlets routinely imply that the President of the United States is a “Russian stooge committing treason, or simply suggest that he needs to be removed from his duly elected office by whatever means.”

Yes, the liberals along with conservatives were there when Kathy Griffin figured that given the non-stop barrage aimed at President Trump she could safely and without consequence take a picture of herself holding a bloody decapitated head of you know who in her hand.

But where were the liberal elites when progressives decided it was just the right time to stage “Julius Caesar” in New York’s Central Park with the lead character resembling none other than Donald Trump — who is stabbed to death on stage.

Oh, the liberals loved that one. Besides, they said, the assassination of Caesar (or Trump) shows “the disastrous effects of violence” as one liberal supporter of the play put it.

I’m sure they’d say the same thing if conservatives staged “Julius Caesar” starring a Barack Obama lookalike. I’m sure they’d brush off the assassination scene, once again, as (with apologies to the Bard) much ado about nothing.

Let’s be clear: The producers of “Julius Caesar” aren’t responsible for the shooting on the baseball field; neither are Madonna or Maxine Waters or the progressives who believe Trump is Hitler or liberals who think he’s not a legitimate president.

But the man who is responsible, James Hodgkinson wasn’t a raving lunatic like the killer in Tucson. Hodgkinson was an anti-Trump zealot who hated Republicans and loved Bernie Sanders and Rachel Maddow and more than a few more progressive media elites. And, no, they’re not responsible for the shooting, either.

But before we go to the surefire “both sides must tone down the rhetoric” routine — something, by the way, that won’t last long if history is any indication — let’s be as clear as the liberal media elite were in 2011. While hard-right Republicans have crossed the rhetorical line more than a few times, much of the angry rhetoric today is coming from liberals and progressives. They’re the ones who are creating an atmosphere where something horrible could, and did, happen.

To change just one word in Paul Krumgman’s column right after the Tucson massacre: The suggestion, finally, is that the left is largely responsible for a political atmosphere in which extreme thoughts are more likely to take root and flower.

Only the gunman is responsible for what happened the other day in Virginia. But it’s not only time for the crazies on the left to tone down the rhetoric, it’s way past time for the liberal media elite to hold their fellow progressives as accountable in 2017 as they held conservatives in 2011 — for a crime they had nothing to do with.